![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
webofevilSIMON HEFFER IS AN INNOCENT VICTIM OF A MISUNDERSTANDING AND A CHAMPION OF THE PEOPLE
In yesterday’s post, someone felt the need to anonymously fire a warning shot across my bows by reminding me that the law says you can libel someone even by telling the truth about them. In the light of this, it has become clear to me that when respected historian, editor and society beauty Simon Heffer [right] repeated the current Conservative canard that Hansard changed its copy because it was leant on by the government, he did not do so in the knowledge that the allegation was false. His part in this was entirely unwitting.
What do readers think could have been the reason for his uncharacteristic lapse in judgment in accidentally printing an untruth?
[Poll #1157413]
In yesterday’s post, someone felt the need to anonymously fire a warning shot across my bows by reminding me that the law says you can libel someone even by telling the truth about them. In the light of this, it has become clear to me that when respected historian, editor and society beauty Simon Heffer [right] repeated the current Conservative canard that Hansard changed its copy because it was leant on by the government, he did not do so in the knowledge that the allegation was false. His part in this was entirely unwitting. What do readers think could have been the reason for his uncharacteristic lapse in judgment in accidentally printing an untruth?
[Poll #1157413]
no subject
Date: 2008-03-20 05:07 pm (UTC)In a prosecution for criminal libel the Defendant would have to show both justification and public benefit, but this has yet to be tested against the Human Rights Act as there hasn't been a prosecution for criminal libel in decades.
I would argue in the alternative that your assertion that Simon Heffer is a liar was a legitimate inference drawn from true facts (and possibly even from matters subject to Parliamentary privilege), and therefore would benefit from the defence of fair comment.
Oh, and calling him a fat fuck is "mere vulgar abuse" and not defamatory.
This opinion provided free of charge is for information only and is not to be relied upon as legal advice. You should always consult a solicitor for formal legal advice. I have to say this to cover my arse. See, I am a real lawyer. Objects in the rear view mirror may appear closer than they are. Not to be taken internally. May contain nuts.